Grants:PEG/FF portal/IRC meeting 16Mar13

[2013-03-16 16:49:18] <TSB_UK> Hello Thuvack, Ilario and Lila. We will start in ten minutes. I will ask you to introduce yourselves (name, country and interests).
[2013-03-16 16:50:10] <Thuvack> hello TSB
[2013-03-16 16:50:18] <Ilario> Hello
[2013-03-16 17:00:32] <TSB_UK> Hello!
[2013-03-16 17:00:43] -->| Kiril (~Kiril@79.126.143.175) has joined #flowfunding
[2013-03-16 17:01:01] =-= Kiril is now known as Guest78721
[2013-03-16 17:01:20] |<-- Guest78721 has left freenode (Client Quit)
[2013-03-16 17:01:42] <lila> Hi everybody
[2013-03-16 17:02:00] -->| Guest78721 (~Kiril@79.126.143.175) has joined #flowfunding
[2013-03-16 17:02:02] <TSB_UK> We are still missing a couple of flow funders. Solstag and Ganesh confirmed they were available to participate today. Andrew sent us a message earlier saying that he would not be able to participate.
[2013-03-16 17:02:49] <TSB_UK> I suggest we start on time and then welcome the other when they join. What do you think, Thuvack, Ilario, Lila and Kiril?
[2013-03-16 17:02:53] <Guest78721> I have some problems with the connection and was able to register only as Guest70721. I'm Kiril.
[2013-03-16 17:03:05] <TSB_UK> Hi Kiril!
[2013-03-16 17:03:11] <Guest78721> Hi
[2013-03-16 17:03:25] <Ilario> We can start IMHO
[2013-03-16 17:04:02] <Thuvack> I'm here
[2013-03-16 17:04:38] <TSB_UK> Ok, could each of you share a little bit about yourselves (name, country and interests)?
[2013-03-16 17:04:43] <lila> yes, we can start now
[2013-03-16 17:06:12] <lila> I'm Lila, from Argentina, city of CÃ³rdoba and my interests are pretty wide, but some of them are: art, education, free software and culture, gender and technology
[2013-03-16 17:06:21] <Thuvack> hello fellow flow funders. I am Dumisani Ndubane, I am South African and am the current president of WM-ZA
[2013-03-16 17:06:37] <Ilario> Ilario Valdelli, Switzerland, my interests are computer sciences and education and culture in general
[2013-03-16 17:07:13] <TSB_UK> (just in case you don't know) I'm Thomas. I am Brazilian, but I live in the UK now. I am coordinating the flow funding project because I am very interested in finding alternatives to empower the Wikimedia movement even more.
[2013-03-16 17:07:22] <Thuvack> In that case of interests: I am an electrical engineer (",)
[2013-03-16 17:07:42] <Guest78721> I'm Kiril. I come from Macedonia. My interests include education, economics, art and history.
[2013-03-16 17:08:38] <TSB_UK> Our agenda for this chat today is mostly to discuss how the flow funding project is moving.
[2013-03-16 17:09:07] <TSB_UK> Could you share some of your flow funding recent activities, describing opportunities and challenges identified so far?
[2013-03-16 17:10:40] <TSB_UK> Three flow funders (Poupou, Andrew and Kiril) have already submitted fund requests.
[2013-03-16 17:10:42] <Guest78721> Few weeks ago I identified an opportunity for a project and subsequently made a recommendation that was submitted few days ago.
[2013-03-16 17:11:24] <Guest78721> If you think it's worth discussing, I can even explain what the project deals with.
[2013-03-16 17:11:29] <TSB_UK> Kiril, can you share with everyone how did you identify the project and what made you decide to fund it?
[2013-03-16 17:13:59] <Ilario> I am also following two potential projects to be funded
[2013-03-16 17:14:05] <lila> Please Kiril, can you explain the project itself also?
[2013-03-16 17:14:27] <Guest78721> First of all, the idea for this project arose at the Faculty of Economics in Skopje. I studied there economics and currently attend post-graduate studies. A professor knew that I do things related to the Wikimedia projects in Macedonia and was interested to include it in his curriculum.
[2013-03-16 17:15:53] <TSB_UK> Kiril and Ilario, in your opinion, what are the unique attributes of the flow funding approach that help the movement support projects like those you are submitting for funding?
[2013-03-16 17:16:32] <TSB_UK> For further detail on Kiril's project: Project Faculty of Economics Skopje - â‚¬1,420 (from April 21st until June 15, 2013) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FF_portal/Recommendations/Faculty_of_Economics_Skopje
[2013-03-16 17:17:46] <TSB_UK> For further details about the other two submitted projects:
[2013-03-16 17:17:46] <TSB_UK> - Project Fotofahrt im HeiÃŸluftballon - â‚¬960 (from April 1st until June 30, 2013) http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FF_portal/Recommendations/Fotofahrt_im_Hei%C3%9Fluftballon
[2013-03-16 17:17:46] <TSB_UK> - Project Wikipedia Tools; Video Tutorials - US$ 579.39 (from April 1st until July 1st, 2013) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FF_portal/Recommendations/Wikipedia_Tools;_Video_Tutorials
[2013-03-16 17:18:20] <Guest78721> I think that one of the most important incentives for me to submit this recommendation form through the flow funding process is the smaller amount of funds than those that are submitted in the regular grantmaking process.
[2013-03-16 17:19:03] <Ilario> My selection of the projects follows some specific goals
[2013-03-16 17:19:32] <Ilario> One goal is to follow the wmf strategy's points
[2013-03-16 17:19:47] <Guest78721> Another important attribute to the flow funding approach is that it won't take so much time than doing the same in a different manner (such as through the GAC or FDC).
[2013-03-16 17:20:22] <Ilario> Another goal is connected with the dimension: small projects and small team (basically individual projects)
[2013-03-16 17:20:55] <Ilario> The third goal is to have as promoter a person not strictly involved in Wikimedia/Wikipedia
[2013-03-16 17:22:38] <TSB_UK> Ilario, and what are the attributes unique to the flow funding approach in your opinion?
[2013-03-16 17:23:08] <Ilario> As member of GAC and IEG
[2013-03-16 17:23:28] <Ilario> I think that it can approach people not involved in Wikimedia/Wikipedia
[2013-03-16 17:24:18] <Ilario> I think that some projects cannot have any chance in GAC or in IEG
[2013-03-16 17:24:42] <Guest78721> I agree with Ilario on this.
[2013-03-16 17:24:46] <lila> I share Ilario's approach, specially the last goal
[2013-03-16 17:24:57] <Guest78721> We always have to make distinction between these three things.
[2013-03-16 17:25:01] <TSB_UK> What kind of projects have no chance in GAC or in IEG?
[2013-03-16 17:25:08] <lila> this one: The third goal is to have as promoter a person not strictly involved in Wikimedia/Wikipedia
[2013-03-16 17:25:41] <Ilario> The projects managed by no wikimedians/wikipedians because they are considered with high risk, even if they are good projects
[2013-03-16 17:26:31] <Ilario> I would make an example
[2013-03-16 17:26:37] <Guest78721> It makes sense that a person receiving funds from a flow funder would have less or no chance if he's no familiar with the Wikimedia Movement,
[2013-03-16 17:26:55] <Ilario> One of the project that I am looking to fund
[2013-03-16 17:27:08] <Ilario> It's a "CafÃ© culturel"
[2013-03-16 17:27:35] <Ilario> It's managed by a wikipedian without experience
[2013-03-16 17:27:41] <Ilario> but the idea is good
[2013-03-16 17:28:01] <Thuvack> doesn't it make matching the project with WMF mission some what difficult when the promoter is not familiar to Wikimedia?
[2013-03-16 17:28:03] <Ilario> because he would also widespread the wikipedia and wikimedia philosophy
[2013-03-16 17:29:34] <TSB_UK> And what is everyone's opinion on the discussion about flow funders being more reactive than proactive (waiting for proponents to submit ideas instead of proactively identifying new projects)?
[2013-03-16 17:29:37] <Thuvack> I have come across some projects I would love to fund, but mission aligning them is somewhat difficult for me
[2013-03-16 17:29:51] <lila> I think there are many projects and people closely related to WMF mission, not collaborating yet
[2013-03-16 17:30:05] <TSB_UK> Thuvack can you give us more details about the challenges you are facing?
[2013-03-16 17:30:10] <Ilario> Personally I am more proactive
[2013-03-16 17:30:32] <TSB_UK> lila, I agree with you very very much.
[2013-03-16 17:30:40] <lila> Most of cases, in my opinion, is just because the don't even know about the WMF projects
[2013-03-16 17:31:01] <TSB_UK> Ilario, is there any reason why you prefer to search for projects yourself?
[2013-03-16 17:31:26] <lila> So, I have understood the FF proposal as a kind of more proactive motion to this people
[2013-03-16 17:31:27] <Ilario> lila, these people may anyway propose their projects to IEG
[2013-03-16 17:31:57] <Guest78721> My opinion is that each flow funder has to know the difference between the FF, GAC, IEG and FDC.
[2013-03-16 17:32:02] <lila> Ilario, people outside WM movement are not aware of IEG
[2013-03-16 17:32:16] <Thuvack> I agree with Ilario ... I would consider a fund request, but going out and searching for a project gives me a chance as a f
[2013-03-16 17:33:30] <Thuvack> flow funder to check and match the project to WMF missions
[2013-03-16 17:33:31] <lila> I'm thinking for instance of gender organizations, usually not very aware of IT world ... indeed
[2013-03-16 17:33:50] <Ilario> TSB, I search for projects because it would be an opportunity to be linked with interesting people not related with Wikimedia
[2013-03-16 17:34:21] <lila> But regarding to gender gap, and information on gender topics, the objectives of WMF are close related to many gender orgs
[2013-03-16 17:34:35] <Ilario> and I hope that these people may have a good approach with Wikimedia, proposing new projects or collaborations in future
[2013-03-16 17:36:08] <lila> The problem I'm facing regarding my FF ideas is it's hard to me to stay separated to this I consider a good idea
[2013-03-16 17:36:22] <lila> I mean, don't participate directly
[2013-03-16 17:36:54] <lila> and I understand this is a problem for FF
[2013-03-16 17:36:55] <TSB_UK> Poupou shared on meta a very interesting point about having to create a channel for her to tranparently receive projects otherwise the local wikimedia community would think she is only supporting her buddies. Does anyone else face a similar challenge?
[2013-03-16 17:37:13] <Thuvack> any ways, for me it would be increasing WMF reach in the global south including closing gender gap
[2013-03-16 17:38:15] <TSB_UK> Lila and other fellow flow funders, what are the challenges you are facing regarding conflict of interests?
[2013-03-16 17:38:57] <lila> I guess is hard to identify a good project you are not involved in in anyway
[2013-03-16 17:39:32] <lila> I mean, by direct participation, actual or past ... or friends working on it
[2013-03-16 17:40:26] <Ilario> I support lila's concern
[2013-03-16 17:40:35] <Ilario> It's difficult to propose a project
[2013-03-16 17:40:39] <Guest78721> The conflict of interest should matter only in case you intend to work on the project.
[2013-03-16 17:40:46] <Ilario> of an unknown person
[2013-03-16 17:40:56] <lila> because FF is a matter of trust, isn't it?
[2013-03-16 17:41:57] <Guest78721> Yes it is. But consider a situation in which the grantee receiving the funds asks for help from you as a flow funder or anybody else from the Wikimedia community.
[2013-03-16 17:42:47] <Guest78721> What do you think about the COI issue in this case?
[2013-03-16 17:43:09] <TSB_UK> Originally, the wikimedia flow funding project excluded only projects where the flow funder was directly involved or those run by relatives of the flow funder. Asaf suggests it should aslo be from outside of the flow funder organization. Do you think we should include projects from the organizations where the flow funders are involved with?
[2013-03-16 17:43:48] <Guest78721> It depends on your definition about an organization.
[2013-03-16 17:44:06] <lila> I guess it's a good policy TSB, in theory ...
[2013-03-16 17:44:36] <Guest78721> If you're employed in the organization, then there is a serious COI.
[2013-03-16 17:45:02] <TSB_UK> Kiril, I think I understand your point and agree with you.
[2013-03-16 17:45:35] <lila> I'm thinking in other kind of more subtles COI
[2013-03-16 17:45:35] <Guest78721> But if you only collaborate with the people in the organization or you were commissioned to do something for them, it's not that serious as in the previous case.
[2013-03-16 17:46:24] <lila> a project supporting old friends of you, for instance
[2013-03-16 17:46:49] <lila> is there a COI?
[2013-03-16 17:46:56] <TSB_UK> Kiril, you are requesting funds for a project in the same university where you are doing you Phd, right? Does anyone see COI in this case?
[2013-03-16 17:47:06] <Thuvack> I am of the view point that one should not be even remotely connected with the Organization or individual being funded as COI is indeed a serious concern for me
[2013-03-16 17:47:34] <Guest78721> It's pretty difficult to measure the COI when talking about friendships, so there is no problem for me to include them in the process.
[2013-03-16 17:47:58] <lila> For me Thuvack, it's almost impossible to think in a project that way
[2013-03-16 17:49:18] <lila> I consider myself as a part of many networks related to free cultura, so it's almost impossible in fact
[2013-03-16 17:49:30] <TSB_UK> For me, apart from ffunder's own project or of relatives, everything should be valid, as long as the process is very transparent and the local wikimedia community is extensively engaged while the project is being implemented.
[2013-03-16 17:49:40] <Guest78721> TSB, it's a very good question. I studied 4 years at the University and worked in two occasions as a Demonstrator. But I don't think there is any serious COI since I'm not one of the organizers of the project.
[2013-03-16 17:50:34] <TSB_UK> And what do you think about the $500 minimum grant amount?
[2013-03-16 17:50:55] <Guest78721> There are almost 1,000 graduates every year from the Faculty of Economics in Skopje, so it's pretty lame to think that each of these persons is in a conflict of interest when collaborating with this institution.
[2013-03-16 17:51:21] <TSB_UK> Have you ever identified a project that should be "flow funded" that needed less than $500?
[2013-03-16 17:51:41] <lila> What is the reason of a minimal amount?
[2013-03-16 17:52:36] <Thuvack> I think the minimum amount is reasonable...
[2013-03-16 17:52:51] <TSB_UK> Lila, mostly because the process now requires WMF's limited time and bank fees are quite high, as far as I understand.
[2013-03-16 17:53:25] <Guest78721> This is a very good point TSB.
[2013-03-16 17:54:20] <Thuvack> that's correct, it would not make financial sense to transfer less than that as the fees would become a significant portion of the total finds
[2013-03-16 17:54:29] <Guest78721> I haven't identified yet any project that requires less than $500, but probably there are such projects.
[2013-03-16 17:55:19] <TSB_UK> Finally, Asaf suggested we should identify more flow funders, since the project is expected to end in July and there are only a few fund requests. I believe we should give the selected candidates more time, instead of replacing them with new candidates. What do you think?
[2013-03-16 17:55:27] <Guest78721> But I still think that the idea beyond the FF is not to support projects with almost zero-funds.
[2013-03-16 17:56:23] <lila> Personally I'm very delayed with my part :(
[2013-03-16 17:56:37] <Guest78721> It's fine to me.
[2013-03-16 17:56:55] <lila> I would like to have more time
[2013-03-16 17:57:21] <Guest78721> However, I think that the deadline until July is to short to make in significant progress.
[2013-03-16 17:58:00] <lila> I'm facing another concern here, specially thinking of projects in Argentina
[2013-03-16 17:58:20] <Thuvack> I am meeting a potential project leader in the next two weeks. it's assesment stage but it is promising.
[2013-03-16 17:58:25] <Guest78721> We should consider the possibility an FF to be able to submit more than one request at the time.
[2013-03-16 17:58:28] <TSB_UK> What is your opinion, Ilario?
[2013-03-16 17:58:40] <Ilario> In my opinion the FF
[2013-03-16 17:58:45] <Ilario> It's something new
[2013-03-16 17:58:54] <Ilario> so the candidates should have more time
[2013-03-16 17:59:04] <Ilario> Peopel are not only selecting projects
[2013-03-16 17:59:08] <TSB_UK> Kiril,, there is only the $2000 limit. You can spend it in for different projects all running at the same time.
[2013-03-16 17:59:12] <Ilario> but also finding a role of the FF
[2013-03-16 17:59:27] <lila> I'm part of the board of WM-ar, so when I think in an idea for Argentina, I inmediately think about proposing as a project of WM-ar
[2013-03-16 17:59:35] <TSB_UK> *four different projects
[2013-03-16 17:59:57] <TSB_UK> Ilario, I agree with you.
[2013-03-16 18:00:10] <TSB_UK> It is 6PM (GMT) now. Is there anything else anyone wants to discuss today?
[2013-03-16 18:00:47] <Ilario> No for me
[2013-03-16 18:01:03] <Guest78721> I have a questions concerned with the future of the FF. What after the end of the Pilot Phase?
[2013-03-16 18:01:28] <lila> Just my last concern... how are you solving it in other chapters?
[2013-03-16 18:01:31] <Thuvack> I also think we should consider an extension of time. adding more flow funders now is not going to solve the problem of project identification. Infact the new members may need more time to wrap this FF idea around their mind before even identifying a project.
[2013-03-16 18:02:16] <TSB_UK> Kiril, I will draft a report about the pilot phase and invite you guys to collaborate.
[2013-03-16 18:02:22] <Thuvack> nothing else from me
[2013-03-16 18:02:36] <Guest78721> Ok, thanks.
[2013-03-16 18:03:18] <Guest78721> I really hope that we can rely on the report and learn in the future from the experiences that we faced on this stage of the development of the process.
[2013-03-16 18:03:40] <TSB_UK> If the pilot is successful, we can then ask for more funds, suggest to the WMF (or a chapter) to implement as a full program, or something else.
[2013-03-16 18:03:58] <Guest78721> Sounds good.
[2013-03-16 18:04:15] <Thuvack> sounds really great
[2013-03-16 18:04:37] <TSB_UK> Any suggestions for Lila on how flow funders should interact with chapters?
[2013-03-16 18:04:51] <Guest78721> That's all. No more questions from me.
[2013-03-16 18:05:38] <Guest78721> My opinion is that the main concern again is the potential COI between the two parties.
[2013-03-16 18:07:08] <Guest78721> However, an interaction has to exist.
[2013-03-16 18:07:48] <TSB_UK> OK then. I suggest we discuss this next time. Thank you very much everyone! Good luck and, if possible, keep us posted how things are going on your end.
[2013-03-16 18:07:52] <Thuvack> yes it is a potentially challenging COI especially since WM ar is legible for direct funding from WMF grants?
[2013-03-16 18:08:13] <Thuvack> Next time then
[2013-03-16 18:08:14] <Guest78721> Very interesting point Thuback.
[2013-03-16 18:08:26] <lila> Yes, this is my concern precisely
[2013-03-16 18:08:30] <Guest78721> Ok, keep it in mind for the next meeting.
[2013-03-16 18:09:24] <TSB_UK> Thank you Lila, Kiril, Ilario and Thuvack!
[2013-03-16 18:09:29] <Guest78721> It's apparent that we should make a draft version with topics for discussion for the next meeting.
[2013-03-16 18:09:33] <Ilario> Thank you
[2013-03-16 18:09:38] <Thuvack> Ok then comrades. we will talk again next time
[2013-03-16 18:09:40] <Guest78721> Thank you Thomas.
[2013-03-16 18:09:49] <Guest78721> Thank you guys.
[2013-03-16 18:09:50] <lila> It's a good idea Kiril
[2013-03-16 18:09:55] |<-- Ilario has left freenode (Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.90 [Firefox 19.0.2/20130307023931])
[2013-03-16 18:10:02] <--| Thuvack has left #flowfunding
[2013-03-16 18:10:16] |<-- Guest78721 has left freenode ()
[2013-03-16 18:10:19] <lila> Bye!
[2013-03-16 18:10:25] |<-- lila has left freenode (Quit: Page closed)